Another point to consider - in living birds choice of mating system appears to
be extremely plastic. Polyandry has evolved more than once in Charadriiformes,
mating systems vary widely within Passeriformes even within the family level,
and accentors may be monogamous, polygynous or polyandrous within the same
subpopulation or even from season to season in the same individuals. Brooding
strategy may be more fixed, but speculating on the limited evidence we have of
dinosaur behavior is AFAIK just that, speculating (or, for someone like Jason,
perfectly acceptable artistic licence - we wouldn't have restorations without
it!).
Ronald Orenstein
1825 Shady Creek Court
Mississauga, ON
Canada L5L 3W2
On 2011-06-27, at 1:26 PM, Jason Brougham <jaseb@amnh.org> wrote:
> Point well taken. We should all remind ourselves that the balance of evidence
> can be easily upset by new discoveries.
>
> Nonetheless, three samples that all agree is real evidence, and not to be
> disregarded either.
>
> -Jason
>
>
> On Jun 27, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Don Ohmes wrote:
>
>> On 6/27/2011 12:40 PM, Jason Brougham wrote:
>>> Let me put it this way: if you HAD to reconstruct the brooding of a non -
>>> avian maniraptoran now, wouldn't it be safest to go with the paternal -
>>> only brooding model? Anything else would be pure speculation.
>> Assuming momentarily that there is a King, and further assuming that He has
>> recently been taken on a tour of the Past by a friendly alien with a Time
>> Machine, and now wishes to test His Ministers of Paleontology against
>> Reality with an eye toward a weeding-out of the frothier types -- yes, a
>> paternal-only model might be the safest bet. Betting that all non-avian
>> maniraptorans followed that or any other single model would not be a risk I
>> cared to take, however...
>
> Jason Brougham
> Senior Principal Preparator
> American Museum of Natural History
> jaseb@amnh.org
> (212) 496 3544
>
>